Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lady Luck (rapper)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was withdrawn. JBsupreme (talk) 06:43, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Lady Luck (rapper)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

I'm saving myself the trouble of the prod/deprod nonsense. Personally I think this is a borderline speedy delete, but it unquestionably fails WP:MUSIC and lacks non-trivial coverage by reliable third party publications. JBsupreme (talk) 05:32, 23 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fails WP:MUSIC. --erachima talk 09:58, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per new sources. --erachima talk 05:41, 29 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep and improve if possible. A quick skim through the first 3 pages of Google hits retrieves an article in The New Yorker, an IMDB profile showing a couple of things that may or may not prove important , and a mention here, which suggest that a bit more digging for sources may be worthwhile before deleting, or even nominating for that matter.--Michig (talk) 11:36, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I have improved the article with the sources I found. The feature in The New Yorker and the series of articles in The Source mean that the article unquestionably passes notability and reliable source guidelines.--Michig (talk) 22:10, 23 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  22:56, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:02, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cirt (talk) 04:49, 28 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep The New Yorker article is an outstanding RS. The others are weaker, but GNG is easily met. Hobit (talk) 00:50, 29 September 2008 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.